|
||
|
||
| PNA: The
Possibilities and Difficulties of Egyptian and Jordanian Rule Summary An Israeli Security Cabinet member said that Egypt and Jordan might have to temporarily take control of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank due to the Palestinian leaderships inability to curb militant activity in its territories. While Cairo might be able to run Gaza, Amman would face a huge geopolitical dilemma if it had to administer the West Bank. Analysis These comments are an Israeli attempt to deal with criticism from Egypt and Jordan for its recent ground operation in the Gaza Strip in which more than 70 Palestinians were killed. It is also an attempt to handle international pressure to push ahead with peace talks in the absence of a credible negotiating partner. The Israelis are letting Cairo and Amman know that the Jewish state would not have to take action in the Palestinian Territories if only they were managed by the two neighboring Arab states. Furthermore, the Israelis are trying to throw the responsibility of creating a sovereign Palestinian state into the Arabs hands. The idea of Egypt playing a role in administering the Gaza Strip is not far-fetched, but Jordan would not want to have any such responsibility regarding the West Bank. Egypt is concerned about Israeli efforts to push Gaza into Cairos court and would prefer to not go beyond the role of mediator in Israeli-Palestinian and intra-Palestinian issues. Should Israeli actions in Gaza create a situation in which inaction hurts Cairo more than involvement would, the Egyptians can be expected to assume greater responsibility in Gazas governance. From Cairos point of view, such a shift could actually ensure that the Gaza Strip does not create a security situation for Egypt. The Egyptians have worked hard to keep Islamism and jihadism under control, and the chaos in Gaza could spill over into Egypt if unchecked. Overseeing Gaza would thus keep with Egypts national security objectives, and Egypts strength combined with Gazas weakness as an entity would serve it well. In stark contrast, the dynamics involving Jordan and the West Bank could constitute a national security threat to the Hashemite monarchy. Having to manage the West Bank could alter the demographics in Jordan, whose population already contains an overwhelming majority of people of Palestinian origin. Jordan as a polity is far weaker than Egypt both economically and militarily. These factors would explain why King Hussein the late father of current Jordanian monarch King Abdullah II was not unhappy to see the Israelis seize the West Bank in the 1967 war and in 1988 when he gladly relinquished any claims to the area. Beyond the domestic situation, Jordan is located in a very tough geopolitical neighborhood with an emergent Iran and Iraqi Shia to the west and a hostile Syria to the north and Iran and Syria both have relations with radical Palestinian forces. Palestinian nationalist, Islamist and jihadist forces backed by Iran and/or Syria could prove lethal to the security of the Hashemite monarchy. This is why we see King Abdullah II constantly pressing the United States to help move the Israeli-Palestinian peace process forward more so than any other Arab leader. He is currently in Washington for that very purpose. Neither Egypt nor Saudi Arabia the rising leader of the Arabs would want to see Jordan collapse, especially not while Lebanon is engulfed in a crisis and Iran is on the march geopolitically. Therefore, their rhetoric in favor of the Palestinians aside, the Egyptians, the Jordanians and the other Arab states will try to ensure that the burden of responsibility for both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip remains Israels. This article is published at Lebanonwire by agreement with www.stratfor.com, the world's leading private intelligence provider. For any questions or comments on this article please write to analysis@stratfor.com |
||
Copyright © 2005 Strategic Forecasting Inc. All rights reserved. |
||
Copyright © 1999-2005 Lenanonwire®.com. All rights reserved. |
||